1. You missed the whole point...I'm not comparing gay/lesbian people to animals.I'm just writing that man/woman marriage has been a tradition for hundreds of years.If it is allowed for same sex marriages,what will be next,the ability to marry more than one individual or an animal.The more that is allowed the more society will ask for.If the gay community wants to marry call it something else and go somewhere else.I'm not"discriminating" against the gay community.Besides homosexuality isn't a race,like most people are trying to label it as,its just a preference,not even close to black/asian/hispanic.

---

2. Religion is a choice too. Perhaps it shouldn't be protected either. Perhaps we should make sure that religious people can't get married. Oh, wait, you don't like that argument? Don't like the idea of being discriminated against because of your religion? Tough. If you want legal protection only to extend to non-choice characteristics, then your religion gets thrown out as something that's protected. Cope. Marriage is between individuals, not genders.

---

3. Dr K. o'hanlan, Yeah right. and the recipe calls for 1 teaspoon of salt...no more...no less Wake up!!! Oh yes by the way, Doc do you know the difference between a doctor and God??? God doesn't pretend to be a doctor. How can you be so obtuse?

---

4. Mike H....what the heck planet are u from and what's your point , if there is one????

---

5. Jon: Please believe me when I tell you, that the long-term devastating effects of divorce, and single parent homes, has been monumental. What makes you think that same-sex marriage can do better? All the best.

---

6. Jon: The terms you deploy to describe the relationships of same-sex relationships are universally appreciated: loving, committed, trusting, etc. However, it represents a hall of mirrors because it overlooks the key issue: gender identity. Others may argue that children raised in homosexual households do fine. However, they fail to consider asking how children from divorced marriages have fared over the years. Where are the fathers? Where are the mothers?

---

7. Jon: How do you respond to a child who wants to know his/her biological father/mother? At the end of the day, children come from a mother and a father. You cannot artificially create this natural phenomenon in a same-sex marriage. Past evolutions regarding marriage such as women's rights, interracial marriage had nothing to do with gender identification, or lack thereof.

---

8. Jon: Equal dignity does not play into the discussion of same-sex marriage. What does matter in this discussion is that so called same-sex marriage will degrade the gender identity that is vital to the most fundamental unit of society, and, upon which, provides the ideal environment to raise children. Children NEED and are entitled to have a mother and a father. Institutionalizing same-sex marriage will, in effect, declare to the world that mothers and fathers don't matter.

---

9. Jon: While the construct of marriage has evolved in terms of social cultures, the one thing that has NOT evolved is the gender relationship - one man and one woman. This concept and relationship is the fundamental core concept critical to identifying marriage as "marriage".

---

10. Inane comments like, "the 4,618,673 California voters who enacted Proposition 22 and whose rights were trampled by the Supreme Court" display a woeful ignorance of the role of the Court. Quite simply, the Court said that Proposition 22 was unconstitutional. That's not making law--that's protecting a minority against discrimination, something well within the Court's purview.

---